(417) 
in (14) the curve makes a much more acute bent, descends with far 
greater rapidity to the minimum and ascends far more rapidly too, 
than the curve that may be deduced from their experiments. 
Whilst the possibility is not excluded that by our law the relation 
between magnitude of stimulus and effect is rendered with some 
accuracy for the sense of weight, such is not the case for the senses 
of sight and hearing, within the limits of observation at least. 
I trust soon to be able to show, that this fact may be the 
consequence of a biological correction, quite independent from accom- 
modation or pupil-alteration, caused solely by addition of stimuli, and 
accompanying every stimulation of sense. 
Bacteriology. — “The Physiological Bacteriology of the intestinal 
canal (2™4 abridged paper: The Bacteriological relations in 
the intestinal canal of the rabbit)” By Dr. Avex Krein. 
(Communicated by Prof. PLACE). 
Already Pasteur fixed the attention on the great signification of 
the question in how far the numerous lower organisms, present in 
the intestinal canal of man and animals, play a part in the digestion. 
Since that time (1885) an extensive literature on the bacteriology 
of the intestinal canal has appeared; the results of these researches 
are in brief as follows: 
In the first part of the small intestine of most animals, if no 
ingesta are present, no, or at least very few bacteria are found, 
(auto-sterilisation of KOHLBRUGGE); downward in the small intestine 
the number increases (NENCKI, GILBERT-Dominict, Brorzu, EScHERICH 
la). A very considerable increase is observed in the Coecum 
(ALAPY, ESCHERICH, KOHLBRUGGE 1i.a.), whilst in the rest of the 
Jarge intestine now an increase, then a diminution of the number 
of lower organisms may be stated. Basing on these observations 
and at the same time in consequence of direct experiments conducted 
in that direction (BIENsTOCK, VINCENZI, ScHürz), the existence of 
an anti-bacterial action in the small intestine is admitted. This 
anti-bacterial action, by killing the “wild germs”’, introduced together 
with the food, is cause of the restriction of the putrefaction processes 
in the intestinal canal. In the Coecum there is no such an anti- 
bacterial action; it has a flora of its own, consisting of the “obligative 
intestinai bacteria’”’ (chiefly B. coli and allied organisms), of which a 
symbiose with the mucous membrane of this portion of the intestinal 
canal must be accepted (ScHorTELIUS, KOHLBRUGGE); this flora is of 
